Daughter's Car Accident - please help.

tesuhoha

pendulum wrote: »

I find it strange she can remember virtually nothing of what happened immediately before the accident (for example, she is unsure of what lane she was in and the position of vehicles around her, and doesn't even know if she was hit or not or by whom), but milliseconds later her memory returns as she "remembers suddenly spinning and hoping that nothing else would hit her. She spun into the central reservation, then spun back to the other side of the road and hit the other crash barrier."

Her memory's working well enough to recall fine details such as the BMW driver's body language in order to claim she looked "guilty" and "looked as if there may have been some involvement". How one can tell this from body language I don't know! Perhaps trying to point the finger of blame away from herself?

I'd suggest she wasn't paying attention in the run-up to the accident, thus she is unsure of what actually happened. Claiming amnesia was quite clever, as it's the only way out! Of course, she'd have been in for a much longer stay in hospital after a head injury serious enough to cause real amnesia.

I think the reason the police officer "didn't seem to take her seriously" isn't because she told him she was a new driver. It's because he's spoken to the witnesses and in the course of his investigation has concluded that noone else was to blame; that she caused or heaviliy contributed to the accident. You've also admitted she's a nervous driver, which is just as bad as being an over-confident one.

Have they ruled out charges against her?

You mis-quoted what I said. I said the BMW driver would not make eye contact and my daughter felt there was some involvement. What seems strange to me is that if someone is injured you tend to look at them to see if they are all right, not avoid eye contact.

However, as you so clearly think my daughter caused the accident look at my post below which I am about to write an update. There was absolutely no question of charging my daughter and I now think the police officer was negligent in his duty.

Bangton

You mentioned the car was purchased in July...from new? If it is a new car (within 12 months) some insurers will replace the vehicle with a brand new model as a benefit to the policy (or allow a payout to the same cost), however that would depend on who your daughter is insured with.

In terms of what they will offer otherwise, an insurer will always look at the current market value for a similar car. So for example if it is a 2010 Yaris with metallic paint with 4000 miles purchased in Yorkshire, an insurers engineers will look into current costings based on that criteria when offering a payout. The payout would go to the finance company who technically still own the vehicle and your daughter may be left with residual debt on the loan due to the dip in price we all see as soon as a car is driven off the forecourt.

Whatever happens, good luck and thank goodness your daughter is ok. (I work in insurance hence posting...I thought it may help rather than causing upset as some forum members seem to like to do!)

Strider590

tesuhoha wrote: »

I now think the police officer was negligent in his duty.

They just have strict targets to meet, any opportunity to chalk up another easy score and they're on it..... Not the officers fault, but the administration and management behind them.

supermanjo

Someone mentioned that it's impossible to bump into another car and not leave a mark. This was my general thoughts on the matter up until recently when my new newly passed neighbour decided to back up into the rear of my car and push in the panel. He then drove forward and the panel popped right back out with ZERO visibility of an accident. I was shocked, I sat there scratching my head. Not even a cripple or crease in the paintwork on either car.

mikey72

Bangton wrote: »

You mentioned the car was purchased in July...from new? If it is a new car (within 12 months) some insurers will replace the vehicle with a brand new model as a benefit to the policy (or allow a payout to the same cost), however that would depend on who your daughter is insured with.

In terms of what they will offer otherwise, an insurer will always look at the current market value for a similar car. So for example if it is a 2010 Yaris with metallic paint with 4000 miles purchased in Yorkshire, an insurers engineers will look into current costings based on that criteria when offering a payout. The payout would go to the finance company who technically still own the vehicle and your daughter may be left with residual debt on the loan due to the dip in price we all see as soon as a car is driven off the forecourt.

Whatever happens, good luck and thank goodness your daughter is ok. (I work in insurance hence posting...I thought it may help rather than causing upset as some forum members seem to like to do!)

So long as it's as much as the guide prices quoted by the FOS, there should be no problems.
As to the "dip in price", it needs to be the amount to replace it with another car of the same age, and type, bought off the forecourt, so no dip in price is to be expected.
Sadly, it never seems to be, when insurers invent their own criteria, they always seem to be low, hence the need to raise a complaint.

tesuhoha

This is an update. I asked for you to be non judgemental but it seems my daughter has been judged and found guilty by some folk.

However, today my husband took my daughter to collect her belongings from the car. I have just typed a long post and lost it so will post the photos separately. He was allowed to view the car and they had the opportunity to take photos.

The recovery man said that he had asked about the driver. He has seen a lot of accidents and he said she was a very lucky young woman to walk away from that one. He said he could see from the marks and paint on the car that she was hit from behind. She was shoved into the central reservation and spun across the carriage and ended up wedged under the crash barrier. The car had to be craned out. There was debris all over the carriageway and three lanes were stopped.

My daughter was suffering from shock yesterday. She had a bang on the head and has a long cut on the back of her head. Her top was covered in blood. Her arm is very swollen, painful and bruised today and she can't move it, even her fingers. Her body is covered in bruises and she aches all over. However, if some of you still find it strange that she could not remember what happened immediately after the accident take a look at the photos below. The last photo I shall endeavour to post is the back of her car. I cannot for the life of me imagine why that police officer did not notice/look at it. I don't know what he was thinking.

What happened was that after the crash while they were waiting for the ambulance she asked the driver who stopped if he had seen what happened and he said 'yes, the BMW driver hit you.' She said that he was certain immediately after the crash.

Therefore to suggest that my daughter should be charged is appalling. Some of you say that it is unlikely that the policeman would judge her because she is a new driver but that is exactly what you have done without knowing anything about her at all.

The person who hit her should be charged with dangerous driving and lying to save their own skin (if it was the BMW) or if it was someone else they should be charged with failing to stop at the scene of an accident. She could easily have died if the car had not been so well designed.

supermanjo

tesuhoha wrote: »

Thanks. The car was a Yaris. To be honest, I think the fact that it was an expensive car saved her life so at the moment I can't think about economising in that way. However, she is very strict about making payments and conscious of what she owes. She has the rest of the week off but is determined that she is not going to take any time off.

I asked her if she slept or blacked out but she says definitely not and she is not a sleepy person. She is a gym going, salad eating healthy person. She doesn't remember fully but her gut feeling is that something hit her or she hit something in the road.

You need to re-think on that. Having a fresh "expensive" car does not in anyway mean its safe. There are plenty of cars on the market sub-£2000 that are VERY safe cars.

Take for instance the 2001-2004 Volvo S40. (NOT the 2004-2010 models, which is when Ford bought Volvo = fail.) It was rated 6th best car out of 250 cars for the years 96-06 and a fully loaded one can be had for £1,500 these day. (52-53 plate.)

I just picked up another (to sell on) 2002 Volvo S40 fully loaded with 67,000 miles for £900 on ebay! These cars were highly under-rated, thus why you can find them for so cheap.

I've become a S40 expert over the past year, lol, so if you need any advice on them, just let me know.

Weird_Nev

Photos? Very interested to see....

tesuhoha

I just tried to post one. Told the post was too long. Still trying.

mikey72

If you want to pursue it further, make a written complaint to the chief constable, and inform your insurers you believe you where hit from behind. They will refer you to the no win no fee company they have dealings with.